Where is the hard evidence? This story reeks of gimmicks and hoaxes popular since the 1950's. In fact, I remember one such "breakthrough" device (very similar in principle) that brought a 12 VDC wire to a device mounted between fuel pump and carburetor. I'm very, very skeptical!

Why does EETimes tarnish its image by publishing junk like this? These sensational claims make EETimes sound like a tabloid rag. No mention of the names of the "researchers" and how they are connected to Temple University or any proof that the "research" has been peer reviewed.

Increased fuel efficiency of 20% implies that roughly 20% of the fuel in a stock diesel exits the engine unburned. Does the EPA allow this much hydrocarbon (or even soot, or worse: CO) in the exhaust of existing engines?
This company http://www.stwa.com/product.htm makes similar absurds claims about a high energy magnet product which they sell.

Similar devices were invented a long time ago. They are in the form of shaped permanent magnets that are clamped around fuel lines. Users claim that there is a significant reduction in fuel consumption.

This sounds like the magnet around the fuel line trick. I investigated this device in 2005. The device also incorporates Eetman Theory which states that as electrons pass through a magnetic field they also gain energy; thus, ignition also has added boosting power and efficiency is increased by 20%.

I have heard of these on the science forums.
I wonder if this could be applied to the 'common' fuel line only? this would simplify fitting greatly.
There maybe an argument to fit one magnet to each fuel injector line as well?
The same technology seems to work well on water too.
Steve

It doesn't burn more fuel, the electric field lines up the hydrocarbons to eliminate tangles, allowing the droplets to be smaller, causing faster combustion, which increases the pressure and efficiency, also, the electric field is much higher than 12 volts, It probibly uses a low power inverter to maintain a field in the thousands of volts.